70012 SCRAPPED ON ARRIVAL err.. rumour has it!

That's the point, isn't it? We all see things differently and to me there's a vast difference, although I'm not as such a big fan of the A1. I doubt I'll convince you of my viewpoint and vice-versa, but an interesting debate.

 

Sorry If it seemed a bit rude. To me though it was like in the bit in Only Fools & Horses when the Chanderlier gets dropped on to the floor, just lughing out of total shock really...

Although having said that if a steamer got dropped I would proberley wince before anything else...

 

Neither Class 58s or 60s can make Class 4 timings while 66s and 70s can.

 

Because we live in a society that thinks that everything bought from foreign shores is far superior to anything we could make here. I mean look at all the german junk on our roads. Buying german is by far the best idea anyway, just ask the A1 trust.....

 

I am sure if 3500+ class 60's were built then they too would be super reliable and could be exported.
It's not exactly a fair playing field comparing a what was a new design class 60 to a 10 year old proven class 66 design.

(The class 59 dated back to the early 1970s and the SD40 and had over 3500 examples ahead of it to iron out the issues.. in fact it went out of production only a few years after the 59's were built, this a factor in the Class 66 being built.. it's prime mover dates back to 1985 and the GP59).

But then newspaper headlines of designs still being tested and effectively "prototypes" failing make good news stories and convince everyone anything British is rubbish.

 

No comparing like with like - Class 58s and Class 60s were designed for strength over speed. I believe drivers often complained that the Class 66s were "gut-less" when new because the Class 59 external styling was making them think "Type 5" whereas the power is really "Type 4". A Class 66 is meant to be a general frieght machine with a range of speeds over strength (though not as adaptable as a Class 47).

If more speed was needed, I am sure that the older British classes could be regeared - it has been done with Class 37s and many times in Europe.

The Class 66 (and Class 59) are based on an old and proven design. It is a British fault that we make everything "cutting edge" whether it needs to be or not. The Class 50s had to be "de-tec-ed" when rebuild at Doncaster to make them more reliable. I think the Class 37s were the last British designed locos not to be too clever for their own good!

Steven

 

Class 58's had a top speed of 80mph, no slouches faster than 66's; class 60's only 60 mph but far more pulling power than a 66, though this didn't stop Freightliner ordering class 66's regeared to 60mph.. While I have no doubt that 66's are more reliable I still can't get my head around new locos arriving from abroad while we are scrapping locos only halfway through their working lives, it's just a waste when they could be overhauled, re-geared, modernised whatever -it's what we used to do to prevent splashing vast amounts of money on new locos! While privatisation has brought some welcome investment (new locos were needed by EWS 10 years ago, I don't disagree on that), new locos are now sought as an easier option than updating existing technology which in railway terms really isn't that old. If it were public money questions would be asked for sure..

 

But it isn't, it's private companies doing what's best for their business. It's probably cheaper to lease 66s/70s then spend money overhauling 56s/58s/60s which aren't standard compared to the ubiquitous 66.

 

That probably the crux of it, plus the threat of swingeing fines if your loco fails, so if its a guarenteed new lease loco that fails, guess who foots the bill. However there should be a massive new loco transport enviromental tax, that will make them think twice about not buying british. £1000 per mile LOL!

 

It'll still probably be the operating company that foots the bill if their shiny new 66 fails, I don't know if any of the FOCs have deals with their maintenance companies (for those that sub-contract the maintenance) to claim compensation when a locomotive fails. Certainly the risk is (must) be reduced by running a modern, reliable 66 than an over-hauled 20-30 year old British diesel.

 

The leasing Companies own the class 66s, & the Class 60s are owned by DB, I am fairly sure that DB have to pay for any/all overhauls/upgrades etc on the 60s, which is probably why so many are stored, who will have to pay for major works on the 66s when they become due after xx years?.

Out of curiosity, how old is the class 70 design?

 

I'd like to see us have the most economical and reliable locos we can, wherever they are from, because I want to see the amount of freight on the railways increase and more lorrys off the roads. That'll only happen if the locos get the goods to their destination on time and the costs can be kept low to compete with the roads. It'd be great if they were British built and the construction jobs were here, but if not, so be it. We live in a global economy now. As for refurbishing older locos, I'm sure DB Schenker would do it, if it made sense and they are supposedly beginning to overhaul a few of the 60s, so we'll soon see if that improves their reliability.

I understand the Class 70 is a new design - I think I read that it was the first time the engine has been used in a rail application, but I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong. GE have a great reputation in the US, so stand every chance of doing well over here.

 

The Powerhaul P616 derives from the Jenbacher J616, an Austrian prime mover used in generator facilities, marine use etc.
Jenbacher was aquired by GE in 2003 and production of this engine, I understand moved to GE in Erie in PA, US.

This is probably it's first rail use, though no doubt not the last, assuming success, GE have a huge marketing strategy for this locomotive, launched at innotrans in 2008, including european gauge versions and potentially construction of the locomotives in europe (Turkey).

 

I undrstand that DB haveapproved the overhaul of up to 20 Class 60's.

See wnxx for details.

 

Is that your entry for the most OTT post of the year?

 

Oh no, I can do much better than that, depending on the recipient.

 

"The Class 50s had to be "de-tec-ed" when rebuild at Doncaster to make them more reliable. "

EE wanted to supply straight copies of DP2 - it was BR who wanted all the gadgets, and no doubt at the time would have required them of the supplier even if the locos were built overseas. It took a private company to break the mould and buy the 59's.

 

Alternatively, the road haulage industry could start to pay a greater contribution to the maintenance and other costs of the infrastructure that they rely on. That, however, would put up the cost of the products that we buy! It all comes down to the prejudices of those who rig the markets. Most Tories have always been prejudiced against railways.